Have a personal or library account? Click to login
Can we combine structural functionality and landscape services assessments in order to estimate the impact of landscape structure on landscape services? Cover

Can we combine structural functionality and landscape services assessments in order to estimate the impact of landscape structure on landscape services?

Moravian Geographical Reports
Volume 21 (2013): Issue 4 (December 2013)
By: Hana Skokanová  
Open Access
|Mar 2014

References

  1. ANTROP, M. (2000): Background concepts for integrated landscape analysis. Agriculture, Ecosystems & Environment, Vol. 77, p. 17-28.10.1016/S0167-8809(99)00089-4
    Search in Google Scholar
  2. BOCK, M. et al. (2005): Spatial indicators for nature conservation from European to local scale. Ecological Indicators, Vol. 5, p. 322-338.10.1016/j.ecolind.2005.03.018
    Search in Google Scholar
  3. BODIN, Ö., TENGÖ, M., NORMAN, A., LUNDBERG, J., ELMQVIST, T. (2006): The value of small size: loss of forest patches and ecological thresholds in Southern Madagascar. Ecological Applications, Vol. 16, p. 440-451.10.1890/1051-0761(2006)016[0440:TVOSSL]2.0.CO;2
    Search in Google Scholar
  4. BURKHARD, B., KROLL, F., MÜLLER, F., WINDHORST, W. (2009): Landscapes' capacities to provide ecosystem services - a concept for land-cover based assessment. Landscape Online, Vol. 15, p. 1-22.10.3097/LO.200915
    Search in Google Scholar
  5. CUSHMAN, S. A., MCGARIGAL, K., NEEL, M. C. (2008): Parsimony in landscape metrics: strength, universality and consistency. Ecological Indicators, Vol. 8, p. 691-703.10.1016/j.ecolind.2007.12.002
    Search in Google Scholar
  6. DAUBER, J. et al. (2003): Landscape structure as an indicator of biodiversity: matrix effects on species richness. Agriculture, Ecosystems & Environment, Vol. 98, p. 321-329. 10.1016/S0167-8809(03)00092-6
    Search in Google Scholar
  7. de GROOT, R. (2006): Function-analysis and valuation as a tool to assess land use conflicts in planning for sustainable, multifunctional landscapes. Landscape and Urban Planning, Vol. 75, p. 175-186. 10.1016/j.landurbplan.2005.02.016
    Search in Google Scholar
  8. de GROOT, R. S., WILSON, M. A., BOUMAND, R. M. J. (2002): A typology for the classification, description and valuation of ecosystem functions, goods and services. Ecological Economics, Vol. 41, p. 393-408.10.1016/S0921-8009(02)00089-7
    Search in Google Scholar
  9. DRAMSTAD, W. E., TVEIT, M. S., FJELLSTAD, W. J., FRY, G. L. A. (2006): Relationships between visual landscape preferences and map-based indicators of landscape structure. Landscape and Urban Planning, Vol. 78, p. 465-474.10.1016/j.landurbplan.2005.12.006
    Search in Google Scholar
  10. ESRI, Inc. (1999-2008): ArcMap 9.3. Redlands, CA.
    Search in Google Scholar
  11. ESSL, F., EGGER, G., ELLMAUER, T., AIGNER , S. (2002): Rote Liste der gefährdeten Biotoptypen Österreichs: Konzept. UBA-Monographien, Umweltbundesamt, Wien. 40 pp.
    Search in Google Scholar
  12. FARIG, L. (2003): Effects of habitat fragmentation on biodiversity. Annual Review of Ecology, Evolution and Systematics, Vol. 34, p. 487-515.10.1146/annurev.ecolsys.34.011802.132419
    Search in Google Scholar
  13. FELD, C. K. et al. (2007): Assessing and monitoring ecosystems - indicators, concepts and their linkage to biodiversity and ecosystem services. The RUBICODE Project. 108 p. [online] available at: http://www.rubicode.net/rubicode/RUBICODE_ Review_on_Indicators.pdf
    Search in Google Scholar
  14. FORMAN, R. T. T., GODRON, M. (1986): Landscape Ecology. John Willey and Sons, Inc., New York, NY, USA. 619 pp.
    Search in Google Scholar
  15. FRANK, S., FÜRST, C., KOSCHKE, L., MAKESCHIN, F. (2012): A contribution towards a transfer of the ecosystem service concept to landscape planning using landscape metrics. Ecological Indicators, Vol. 21, p. 30-38.10.1016/j.ecolind.2011.04.027
    Search in Google Scholar
  16. HAINES-YOUNG, R., CHOPPING, M. (1996): Quantifying landscape structure: a review of landscape indices and their application to forested landscapes. Progress in Physical Geography, Vol. 20, p. 418-445.10.1177/030913339602000403
    Search in Google Scholar
  17. HAINES-YOUNG, R., POTSCHIN, M. (2008): England's Terrestrial Ecosystem Services and the Ecosystem Approach. Full Technical Report. 89 pp.
    Search in Google Scholar
  18. HERMANN, A. et al. (2013): Assessment framework for landscape services in European cultural landscapes: An Austrian Hungarian case study. Ecological Indicators. (In press).10.1016/j.ecolind.2013.01.019
    Search in Google Scholar
  19. HERMANN, A., SCHLEIFER, S., WRBKA, T. (2011): The concept of ecosystem services regarding landscape research: A review. Living Reviews in Landscape Research, Vol. 5, p. 1-37.10.12942/lrlr-2011-1
    Search in Google Scholar
  20. HOKIT, D. G., STITH, B. M., BRANCH, L. C. (1999): Effects of landscape structure in Florida scrub: A population perspective. Ecological Applications, Vol. 9, p. 124-134.10.1890/1051-0761(1999)009[0124:EOLSIF]2.0.CO;2
    Search in Google Scholar
  21. KONG, F., YIN, H., NAKAGOSHI, N. (2007): Using GIS and landscape metrics in the hedonic price modeling of the amenity vaule of urban green space: A case study in Jinan City, China. Landscape and Urban Planning, Vol. 79, p. 240-252.10.1016/j.landurbplan.2006.02.013
    Search in Google Scholar
  22. KUIPER, J. (1998): Landscape quality based upon diversity, coherence and continuity: Landscape planning at different planning-levels in the River area of The Netherlands. Landscape and Urban Planning, Vol. 43, p. 91-104.10.1016/S0169-2046(98)00075-9
    Search in Google Scholar
  23. KUTTNER, M., HAINZ-RENETZEDER, C., HERMANN, A., WRBKA, T. (2013): Borders without barriers - Structural functionality and green infrastructure in the Austrian-Hungarian transboundary region of Lake Neusiedl. Ecological Indicators, Vol. 31, p. 59-72.10.1016/j.ecolind.2012.04.014
    Search in Google Scholar
  24. LAUTENBACH, S., KUGEL, C., LAUSCH, A., SEPPELT, R. (2011): Analysis of historic changes in regional ecosystem service provisioning using land use data. Ecological Indicators, Vol. 11, p. 676-687.10.1016/j.ecolind.2010.09.007
    Search in Google Scholar
  25. MCGARIGAL, K., CUSHMAN, S. A., NEEL, M., ENE, E. (2002): FRAGSTATS: spatial pattern analysis program for categorical maps. [online] Available at: http://www.umass.edu/landeco/research/fragstats/fragstats.html MEA (2005): Ecosystems and Human Well-Being: Synthesis Report. Island Press, Washington, DC., 155 pp.
    Search in Google Scholar
  26. MOSER, B., JAEGER, A. G., TAPPEINER, U., TASSER, E., EISELT, B. (2007): Modification of the effective mesh size for measuring landscape fragmentation to solve the boundary problem. Landscape Ecology, Vol. 22, p. 447-459.10.1007/s10980-006-9023-0
    Search in Google Scholar
  27. MÍCHAL, I. (1994): Ekologická stabilita. Veronica, Brno. 275 pp.
    Search in Google Scholar
  28. NAVEH, Z., LIEBERMAN, A. (1994): Landscape ecology, Theory and Applicaton. Springer-Verlag, USA, New York. 356 pp.10.1007/978-1-4757-2331-1
    Search in Google Scholar
  29. NG, C. N., XIE, Y. J., YU, X. J. (2013): Integrating landscape connectivity into the evaluation of ecosystem services for biodiversity conservation and its implications for landscape planning. Applied Geography, Vol. 42, p. 1-12.10.1016/j.apgeog.2013.04.015
    Search in Google Scholar
  30. NOVÁKOVÁ, J., SKALOŠ, J., KAŠPAROVÁ, I. (2006): Krajinná ekologie. Skripta ke cvičením. Lesnická práce, Kostelec nad Černými Lesy. 31 pp.
    Search in Google Scholar
  31. PELLANTOVÁ, J. [ed.] (1994): Metodika mapování krajiny pro potřeby ochrany přírody a krajiny ve smyslu zákona ČNR 114/92 Sb. ČÚOP Praha - Výzkumné a monitorovací pracoviště v Brně, Praha. 34 pp.
    Search in Google Scholar
  32. PETROVIČ, F. (2005): Vývoj krajiny v oblasti štálového osídlenia Pohronského Inovca a Tribeča. Ústav krajinnej ekológie SAV, pobočka Nitra, Bratislava. 209 pp.
    Search in Google Scholar
  33. POTSCHIN, M. (2009): Land use and the state of the natural environment. Land Use Policy, Vol. 26, p. S170-S177.10.1016/j.landusepol.2009.08.008
    Search in Google Scholar
  34. PUCHEROVÁ, Z. [ed.] (2007): Druhotná krajinná štruktúra (Metodická príručka k mapovaniu). UKF v Nitre, Nitra. 124 pp.
    Search in Google Scholar
  35. RIITERS, K. H. et al. (1995): A factor analysis of landscape pattern and structure metrics. Landscape Ecology, Vol. 10, p. 29-39.10.1007/BF00158551
    Search in Google Scholar
  36. SEJÁK, J. et. al. (2010): Hodnocení funkcí a služeb ekosystémů České republiky. Fakulta životního prostředí UJEP v Ústí nad Labem, Ústí nad Labem. 198 pp.
    Search in Google Scholar
  37. SEPPELT, R. et al. (2012): Form follows function? Proposing a blueprint for ecosystem service assessments based on reviews and case studies. Ecological Indicators, Vol. 21, p. 145-154.10.1016/j.ecolind.2011.09.003
    Search in Google Scholar
  38. SHERROUSE, B. C., CLEMENT, J. M., SEMMENS, D. J. (2011): A GIS application for assessing, mapping, and quantifying the social values of ecosystem services. Applied Geography, Vol. 31, p. 748-760.10.1016/j.apgeog.2010.08.002
    Search in Google Scholar
  39. SCHINDLER, S., POIRAZIDIS, K., WRBKA, T. (2008): Towards a core set of landscape metrics for biodiversity assessments. A case study from Dadia National Park, Greece. Ecological Indicators, Vol. 8, p. 502-514.
    Search in Google Scholar
  40. SKOKANOVÁ, H., EREMIÁŠOVÁ, R. (2012): Changes in the secondary landscape structure and the connection to ecological stability: the cases of two model areas in the Czech Republic. Ekológia (Bratislava), Vol. 31, p. 33-45.10.4149/ekol_2012_01_33
    Search in Google Scholar
  41. SKOKANOVÁ, H., EREMIÁŠOVÁ, R. (2013): Landscape functionality in protected and unprotected areas: Case studies from the Czech Republic. Ecological Informatics, Vol. 14, p. 71-74.10.1016/j.ecoinf.2012.11.007
    Search in Google Scholar
  42. STATSOFT, Inc. (2004): STATISTICA Cz, version 10.0. Available at www.statsoft.cz.
    Search in Google Scholar
  43. SU, S., XIAO, R., JIANG, Z., ZHANG, Y. (2012): Characterizing landscape pattern and ecosystem services value changes for urbanization impacts at an eco-regional scale. Applied Geography, Vol. 34, p. 295-305.10.1016/j.apgeog.2011.12.001
    Search in Google Scholar
  44. SYRBE, R.-U., WALZ, U. (2012): Spatial indicators for the assessment of ecosystem services: Providing, benefitting and connecting areas and landscape metrics. Ecological Indicators, Vol. 21, p. 80-88. 10.1016/j.ecolind.2012.02.013
    Search in Google Scholar
  45. STEINHARDT, U., HERZOG, F., LAUSCH, A., MÜLLER, E., LEHMANN, S. (1999): Hemeroby index for landscape monitoring and evaluation. In: Hyatt, D.E., Lenz, R.J. [eds.]: Environmental indices - System analysis approach. EOLSS Publ., Oxford, pp. 237-254.
    Search in Google Scholar
  46. TERMORSHUIZEN, J., OPDAM, P. (2009): Landscape services as a bridge between landscape ecology and sustainable development. Landscape Ecology, Vol. 24, p. 1037-1052.10.1007/s10980-008-9314-8
    Search in Google Scholar
  47. TISCHENDORF, L. (2001): Can landscape indices predict ecological processes consistently? Landscape Ecology, Vol. 16, p. 235-254.
    Search in Google Scholar
  48. TSCHARNTKE, T., STEFFAN-DEWENTER, I., KRUESS, A., THIES, C. (2002): Characteristics of insect populations on habitat fragments: A mini review. Ecological Research, Vol. 17, p. 229-239.10.1046/j.1440-1703.2002.00482.x
    Search in Google Scholar
  49. VAN DER HORST, D. (2011): Adoption of payments for ecosystem services: an application of the Hägerstrand model. Applied Geography, Vol. 31, p. 668-676.10.1016/j.apgeog.2010.12.001
    Search in Google Scholar
  50. VONDRUŠKOVÁ, H. [ed.] (1994): Metodika mapování krajiny. SMS Hradec Králové, Praha. 55 pp.
    Search in Google Scholar
  51. WAGNER, H. H., FORTIN, M. J. (2005): Analysis of landscapes: concepts and statistics. Ecology, Vol. 86, p. 1975-1987.10.1890/04-0914
    Search in Google Scholar
  52. WAINGER, L. A., KING, D. M, MACK, R. N., PRICE, E. W., MASLIN, T. (2010): Can the concept of ecosystem services be practially applied to improve natural resource managament decisions? Ecological Economics, Vol. 68, p. 978-987.
    Search in Google Scholar
  53. WALLACE, K. J. (2007): Classification of ecosystem services: Problems and solutions. Biological Conservation, Vol. 139, p. 235-246.10.1016/j.biocon.2007.07.015
    Search in Google Scholar
  54. WEINSTOERFFER, J., GIRARDIN, P. (2000): Assessment of the contribution of land use pattern and intensity to landscape quality: use of a landscape indicator. Ecological Modelling, Vol. 130, p. 95-109.10.1016/S0304-3800(00)00209-X
    Search in Google Scholar
  55. WILLEMEN, L., VERBURG, P. H., HEIN, L., van MENSVOORT, M. E. F. (2008): Spatial characterization of landscape functions. Landscape and Urban Planning, Vol. 88, p. 34-43.10.1016/j.landurbplan.2008.08.004
    Search in Google Scholar
  56. YAPP, G., WALKER, J., THACKWAY, R. (2010): Linking vegetation type and condition to ecosystem goods and services. Ecological Complexity, Vol. 7, p. 292-301. 10.1016/j.ecocom.2010.04.008
    Search in Google Scholar
DOI: https://doi.org/10.2478/mgr-2013-0016 | Journal eISSN: 2199-6202 | Journal ISSN: 1210-8812
Journal RSS Feed
Language: English
Page range: 2 - 14
Published on: Mar 7, 2014
Published by: Czech Academy of Sciences, Institute of Geonics
In partnership with: Paradigm Publishing Services
Publication frequency: 4 issues per year
Keywords:
landscape assessment,
structural functionality,
landscape services,
landscape metrics,
Czech Republic
Related subjects:
Business and economics,
Business management,
Industries,
Environmental management,
Geosciences,
Geography

© 2014 Hana Skokanová, published by Czech Academy of Sciences, Institute of Geonics
This work is licensed under the Creative Commons License.

Volume 21 (2013): Issue 4 (December 2013)Next article